Sielken Davis

Below is the play by play from the appraiser Cheryl W***It must be noted that *** * *** NEVER hired this firm to do any work or perform any services so this complaint and request for a
refund is completely unfounded and out of place*** * *** NEVER paid the appraiser Cheryl W*** or the company Sielken Davis LLCSielken Davis LLC works directly for Appraisal Management CompaniesIn this case we were hired by an AMC and NOT *** * *** so a refund is impossible because we were never paid by her and never invoiced her for any money*** ***' appears upset that she did not qualify for her refinance and is accusing the appraiser of causing thatSee below for what actually happened back in April according to the appraiser: At the time of inspection, Thursday April **, 2015, I did take someone else with me as a witness due to the lender/client warning me about *** *** *** trying to push comparable sales on themThis is a sign of someone trying to push value upon an appraiser, which is unacceptable in appraisal practice, therefore I wanted to have someone else with me in case she tried to influence a value on me in any way I would have a witnessI did not explain the reasoning that I had someone with me to *** ***She did not inform me in any way that she was uncomfortable with someone else being thereArriving at the property I first introduced myself and introduced the person I was with by nameShe then asked me for a business card and I informed her that I was out of them and in the process of having more madeAt that time she did appear to be uncomfortable and said that was just not how a professional she be and that was unheard ofI then told her that I could leave before proceeding any further with the inspection and have the lender/client reassign the order to another appraiserI did have a copy of my appraisal license in the car and I offered to retrieve them and she responded by telling me not to worry about it and to continue with the inspectionI continued by asking about any renovations that had been made on the property and she explained while walking me through the house and showing me some of the upgradesI did not take any interior photos at this time I was just observing the upgrades she was showing meI explained that I would need to measure the exterior of the home then I would need to reenter in order to properly label the rooms on the sketch along with taking photos of each roomShe wanted me to complete the interior first then proceed outside to measureI explained to her that I needed to have the exterior measurements (sketch) first as it is needed to properly label the rooms on the sketch once insideShe did not appear too happy with this request and said that she would not tell me how do my job anymore and to do what I needed to doOnce reentering the interior *** *** asked me to explain the appraisal process to her as she was not familiar with the process and I graciously did so the best that I couldShe appeared to not be comprehending what I was telling her as she even made a comment to me that she did not understand I took my time to try to explain it again along with letting her that their are certain (USPAP, Fannie Mae, lender, client, state) guidelines, regulations, standards that we have to follow and she appeared to be getting very irritated again (I'm not sure if it was with me or herself) for not understandingShe told me again to just do what I had to do on the inside as she went to the back bedroom/office and stayed on the computer the entire time I was taking the interior photographsThroughout the inspection I have to walk through the house and take photos of every roomI angle the camera to get the best shot of the room WITHOUT moving anything in the roomsI am the eyes for the lender/client and try to get the best pictures, especially any updates/renovations on the property*** *** gave me a copy of the renovated/updated items that she made up from her computerI scanned the list of improvements she gave me into the appraisal report when submitted to the lender/client with the proper interior/exterior photos takenI asked her if she had the permits for the renovations/additions and she told me yes put she did not know where they wereI informed her that I would have to verify that the renovations were permitted through the city/countyThis process can be time consuming as the the permits department is not easy to reachMany messages and many continuous calls were made in attempt to verify the permitsI finally reached someone at the permi ts department and I was informed that they have a new process for obtaining permitsI would have to go online to file out a form for verification of the permits, I asked how long this would take she informed me that it could be a couple of weeks or moreDue to this taking time the lender/client requested that I make the report "subject to" (subject to the renovations/additions being permitted) and submit the report so I did so on April ***Once the report is sent it is then out of the appraisers hands and up to the lender/client to approve the loan or not As far as me intentionally causing delays in the appraisal process to eat up time of her rate lockI as the appraiser is unaware of the time limit placed on a rate lock, this is between the homeowner (*** ***) and her lenderThe appraiser has no knowledge of any rate lock time restraintsIf a time restraint is nearing the end of time this is something that the homeowner needs to discuss with their lender and not the appraiser then the lender/client will contact the appraiser as the appraiser has nothing to do with what is agreed upon between the homeowner and their lenderI have received no payment/fee from *** *** as I receive my payment/fee from a third party source known as an AMC (the appraisers client) which acts as a middle man between the appraiser and the lenderIf she paid someone it was her lender, in the amount that was agreed upon between her and her lender, not me as the appraiserAs I was leaving *** *** home she asked me to explain the appraisal process to her again and I spent another to minutes with her on her front porchShe apologized to me for not understanding that, in her own words "she really was not a stupid person as she has a couple of master degrees but she had been under a tremendous amount of stress due to her health issues (battling cancer) and medication that she was on and now her sons health issues, which he had to be hospitalized." She then went into to telling me that the whole reason for the refinance was due to her son having to be hospitalizedI then gave my condolences and wished her and her son the bestI understand that *** *** has another issue with the "Q2" ratingThis rating refers to the "Quality of Construction"I actually rated her home as a "Q3" rating therefore I believe that *** *** is trying to refer to the "Condition" rating and not the "Quality of Construction" rating of her home as the condition was rated as a "C2"However, I have explained all the ratings that have been mentioned in the following paragraph*** *** home was built in with a recent renovation and additional square foot addedAlthough there have been very nice renovations to her home it is not a "unique structure" from the other properties within her neighborhoodAs they were built/constructed by the same/similar builder in the 50'sThe recent renovations to her property have been considered within the "condition" rating of her home then compared to other properties within her marketing areaAgain, a list of her renovations were scanned into the report , dually noted and properly considered then adjusted forAs far as her garage being extended you can still only store two cars within the garageAn adjustment for a garage is not adjusted by the square footage of the garage however it is adjusted by the number of cars for that garageIt is not unusual for a garage to have additional storage room/area in itI understand that *** *** has an issue with some of the comparable (*** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***) that were providedAfter the report was sent to the lender/client the lender/client notified me of these issues and requested a revisionThese issues were addressed and commented on within the report on April ***Five comparable sales were provided within this report and although there were comparable sales provided that were not in the same/similar condition or same/similar quality of construction as *** ***, they were provided for bracketing purposes and proper adjustments were made for the differences if deemed necessaryTwo of the comparable sales were of the same/similar condition and four were of same/similar quality of constructionAll items (such as the GLA, site size, room count, condition, quality of construction, car storage, porches/decks/patios, etc.) have to be bracketed as this is part of appraisal practiceThe appraisal ratin g that *** *** is referring to "Q2" and "Q1" is as follows: Q- Dwellings with this quality rating are usually unique structures that are individually designed by an architect for a specified user(*** *** home was constructed by a typical builder in that marketing area in the 50's)Such residences typically are constructed from detailed architectural plans and specifications and feature an exceptional high level of workmanship and exceptionally high-grade materials throughout the interior and exterior of the structureThe design features exceptionally high-quality exterior refinements and ornamentation, and exceptionally high-quality interior refinementsThe workmanship, materials, and finishes throughout the dwelling are of exceptionally high quality(This quality rating is the highest level of rating and is typically used for multi-million dollar properties.) Q-- Dwellings with this quality rating are often custom designed for co nstruction on an individual property owner's siteHowever, dwellings in this quality grade are also found in high-quality tract developments featuring residence construction from individual plans or from highly modified or upgraded plansThe design features detailed, high quality exterior ornamentation, high-quality interior refinements, and detailThe workmanship, materials, and finishes throughout are generally of high or very high qualityQ-- Dwellings with this quality rating are residences of higher quality built from individual or readily available designer plans in above-standard residential tract developments or on an individual property owner's siteThe design includes significant exterior ornamentation and interiors that are well finishedThe workmanship exceeds acceptable standards and many finishes throughout the dwelling have been upgraded from "stock" standardsPlease note that *** *** property was not constructed as a "unique structure" as it is a brick ranch home, sitting on the same foundation as it did when first built in the 50'sIt is of similar construction and style as the other properties within the subdivision however the front porch has been modified along with the rear porch with additional square footage added to the rearSome/most of the interior features have been updated/renovatedThe "condition" ratings is as follows: C- (This is the highest level of rating there is.) The improvements have been very recently constructed and have not previously been occupiedThe entire structure and all components are new and the dwelling features no physical depreciation.*Note: Newly constructed improvement that feature recycled and/or components can be considered new dwellings provided that the dwelling is placed on a 100% new foundation and the the recycled materials and the recycled components have been rehabilitated/re-manufactured into like-new conditionRecently constructed improvements that have not been previously occupied are not considered "new" if they have any significant physical depreciation (i.e., newly constructed dwelling that have been vacant for an extended period of time without adequate maintenance or upkeep)C- The improvements feature no deferred maintenance, little or no physical depreciation, and require no repairsVirtually all building components are new or have been recently repaired, refinished, or rehabilitatedAll outdated components and finishes have been updated and/or replaced with current components that meet current standardsDwellings in this category either are almost new or have been recently completely renovated and are similar in condition to new constructionIf you need any further clarification please feel free to contact me

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID# [redacted], and am concerned that my and my son's very private health issues will be published on your web site in the business's response.  Please help me to keep these things private.  I am unsure if you publish names or not. Although I disagree with the business's response, she has made it personal; I thus wish to end the complaint.  please inform me how to do so without completely withdrawing it.Best,  [redacted]
[Your Answer Here]
 
 
 
 
In order for the Revdex.com to appropriately process your response, you MUST answer the question above.
Sincerely,
[redacted]

Below is the play by play from the appraiser Cheryl W[redacted]. It must be noted that [redacted] NEVER hired this firm to do any work or perform any services so this complaint and request for a refund is completely unfounded and out of place. [redacted] NEVER paid the appraiser Cheryl...

W[redacted] or the company Sielken Davis LLC. Sielken Davis LLC works directly for Appraisal Management Companies. In this case we were hired by an AMC and NOT [redacted] so a refund is impossible because we were never paid by her and never invoiced her for any money. [redacted]' appears upset that she did not qualify for her refinance and is accusing the appraiser of causing that. See below for what actually happened back in April according to the appraiser: At the time of inspection, Thursday April **, 2015, I did take someone else with me as a witness due to the lender/client warning me about [redacted] trying to push comparable sales on them. This is a sign of someone trying to push value upon an appraiser, which is unacceptable in appraisal practice, therefore I wanted to have someone else with me in case she tried to influence a value on me in any way I would have a witness. I did not explain the reasoning that I had someone with me to [redacted]. She did not inform me in any way that she was uncomfortable with someone else being there. Arriving at the property I first introduced myself and introduced the person I was with by name. She then asked me for a business card and I informed her that I was out of them and in the process of having more made. At that time she did appear to be uncomfortable and said that was just not how a professional she be and that was unheard of. I then told her that I could leave before proceeding any further with the inspection and have the lender/client reassign the order to another appraiser. I did have a copy of my appraisal license in the car and I offered to retrieve them and she responded by telling me not to worry about it and to continue with the inspection. I continued by asking about any renovations that had been made on the property and she explained while walking me through the house and showing me some of the upgrades. I did not take any interior photos at this time I was just observing the upgrades she was showing me. I explained that I would need to measure the exterior of the home then I would need to reenter in order to properly label the rooms on the sketch along with taking photos of each room. She wanted me to complete the interior first then proceed outside to measure. I explained to her that I needed to have the exterior measurements (sketch) first as it is needed to properly label the rooms on the sketch once inside. She did not appear too happy with this request and said that she would not tell me how do my job anymore and to do what I needed to do. Once reentering the interior [redacted] asked me to explain the appraisal process to her as she was not familiar with the process and I graciously did so the best that I could. She appeared to not be comprehending what I was telling her as she even made a comment to me that she did not understand . I took my time to try to explain it again along with letting her that their are certain (USPAP, Fannie Mae, lender, client, state) guidelines, regulations, standards that we have to follow and she appeared to be getting very irritated again (I'm not sure if it was with me or herself) for not understanding. She told me again to just do what I had to do on the inside as she went to the back bedroom/office and stayed on the computer the entire time I was taking the interior photographs. Throughout the inspection I have to walk through the house and take photos of every room. I angle the camera to get the best shot of the room WITHOUT moving anything in the rooms. I am the eyes for the lender/client and try to get the best pictures, especially any updates/renovations on the property. [redacted] gave me a copy of the renovated/updated items that she made up from her computer. I scanned the list of improvements she gave me into the appraisal report when submitted to the lender/client with the proper interior/exterior photos taken. I asked her if she had the permits for the renovations/additions and she told me yes put she did not know where they were. I informed her that I would have to verify that the renovations were permitted through the city/county. This process can be time consuming as the the permits department is not easy to reach. Many messages and many continuous calls were made in attempt to verify the permits. I finally reached someone at the permi ts department and I was informed that they have a new process for obtaining permits. I would have to go online to file out a form for verification of the permits, I asked how long this would take she informed me that it could be a couple of weeks or more. Due to this taking time the lender/client requested that I make the report "subject to" (subject to the renovations/additions being permitted) and submit the report so I did so on April [redacted]. Once the report is sent it is then out of the appraisers hands and up to the lender/client to approve the loan or not As far as me intentionally causing delays in the appraisal process to eat up time of her rate lock. I as the appraiser is unaware of the time limit placed on a rate lock, this is between the homeowner ([redacted]) and her lender. The appraiser has no knowledge of any rate lock time restraints. If a time restraint is nearing the end of time this is something that the homeowner needs to discuss with their lender and not the appraiser then the lender/client will contact the appraiser as the appraiser has nothing to do with what is agreed upon between the homeowner and their lender. I have received no payment/fee from [redacted] as I receive my payment/fee from a third party source known as an AMC (the appraisers client) which acts as a middle man between the appraiser and the lender. If she paid someone it was her lender, in the amount that was agreed upon between her and her lender, not me as the appraiser. As I was leaving [redacted] home she asked me to explain the appraisal process to her again and I spent another 20 to 30 minutes with her on her front porch. She apologized to me for not understanding that, in her own words "she really was not a stupid person as she has a couple of master degrees but she had been under a tremendous amount of stress due to her health issues (battling cancer) and medication that she was on and now her sons health issues, which he had to be hospitalized." She then went into to telling me that the whole reason for the refinance was due to her son having to be hospitalized. I then gave my condolences and wished her and her son the best. I understand that [redacted] has another issue with the "Q2" rating. This rating refers to the "Quality of Construction". I actually rated her home as a "Q3" rating therefore I believe that [redacted] is trying to refer to the "Condition" rating and not the "Quality of Construction" rating of her home as the condition was rated as a "C2". However, I have explained all the ratings that have been mentioned in the following paragraph. [redacted] home was built in 1957 with a recent renovation and additional square foot added. Although there have been very nice renovations to her home it is not a "unique structure" from the other properties within her neighborhood. As they were built/constructed by the same/similar builder in the 50's. The recent renovations to her property have been considered within the "condition" rating of her home then compared to other properties within her marketing area. Again, a list of her renovations were scanned into the report , dually noted and properly considered then adjusted for. As far as her garage being extended you can still only store two cars within the garage. An adjustment for a garage is not adjusted by the square footage of the garage however it is adjusted by the number of cars for that garage. It is not unusual for a garage to have additional storage room/area in it. I understand that [redacted] has an issue with some of the comparable ([redacted]) that were provided. After the report was sent to the lender/client the lender/client notified me of these issues and requested a revision. These issues were addressed and commented on within the report on April [redacted]. Five comparable sales were provided within this report and although there were comparable sales provided that were not in the same/similar condition or same/similar quality of construction as [redacted], they were provided for bracketing purposes and proper adjustments were made for the differences if deemed necessary. Two of the comparable sales were of the same/similar condition and four were of same/similar quality of construction. All items (such as the GLA, site size, room count, condition, quality of construction, car storage, porches/decks/patios, etc.) have to be bracketed as this is part of appraisal practice. The appraisal ratin g that [redacted] is referring to "Q2" and "Q1" is as follows: Q1 - Dwellings with this quality rating are usually unique structures that are individually designed by an architect for a specified user. ([redacted] home was constructed by a typical builder in that marketing area in the 50's). Such residences typically are constructed from detailed architectural plans and specifications and feature an exceptional high level of workmanship and exceptionally high-grade materials throughout the interior and exterior of the structure. The design features exceptionally high-quality exterior refinements and ornamentation, and exceptionally high-quality interior refinements. The workmanship, materials, and finishes throughout the dwelling are of exceptionally high quality. (This quality rating is the highest level of rating and is typically used for multi-million dollar properties.) Q-2 - Dwellings with this quality rating are often custom designed for co nstruction on an individual property owner's site. However, dwellings in this quality grade are also found in high-quality tract developments featuring residence construction from individual plans or from highly modified or upgraded plans. The design features detailed, high quality exterior ornamentation, high-quality interior refinements, and detail. The workmanship, materials, and finishes throughout are generally of high or very high quality. Q-3 - Dwellings with this quality rating are residences of higher quality built from individual or readily available designer plans in above-standard residential tract developments or on an individual property owner's site. The design includes significant exterior ornamentation and interiors that are well finished. The workmanship exceeds acceptable standards and many finishes throughout the dwelling have been upgraded from "stock" standards. Please note that [redacted] property was not constructed as a "unique structure" as it is a brick ranch home, sitting on the same foundation as it did when first built in the 50's. It is of similar construction and style as the other properties within the subdivision however the front porch has been modified along with the rear porch with additional square footage added to the rear. Some/most of the interior features have been updated/renovated. The "condition" ratings is as follows: C1 - (This is the highest level of rating there is.) The improvements have been very recently constructed and have not previously been occupied. The entire structure and all components are new and the dwelling features no physical depreciation.*Note: Newly constructed improvement that feature recycled and/or components can be considered new dwellings provided that the dwelling is placed on a 100% new foundation and the the recycled materials and the recycled components have been rehabilitated/re-manufactured into like-new condition. Recently constructed improvements that have not been previously occupied are not considered "new" if they have any significant physical depreciation (i.e., newly constructed dwelling that have been vacant for an extended period of time without adequate maintenance or upkeep). C2 - The improvements feature no deferred maintenance, little or no physical depreciation, and require no repairs. Virtually all building components are new or have been recently repaired, refinished, or rehabilitated. All outdated components and finishes have been updated and/or replaced with current components that meet current standards. Dwellings in this category either are almost new or have been recently completely renovated and are similar in condition to new construction. If you need any further clarification please feel free to contact me.

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID# [redacted], and am concerned that my and my son's very private health issues will be published on your web site in the business's response.  Please help me to keep these things private.  I am unsure if you publish names or not.
 
Although I disagree with the business's response, she has made it personal; I thus wish to end the complaint.  please inform me how to do so without completely withdrawing it.
Best,
 
[redacted]

[Your Answer Here]
 
 
 
 
In order for the Revdex.com to appropriately process your response, you MUST answer the question above.
Sincerely,
[redacted]

Review: Had [redacted] done her job properly, we would not have had spend time finding another competitive mortgage and money paying for an accurate appraisal. She was not only incompetent, but conducted herself in an entirely unprofessional manner. Thanks to Cheryl W[redacted], my husband and I lost our mortgage lock and had to pay for a second appraisal. We have arranged numerous mortgages over the last 18 years, and this is the first time we have had any issue with an appraiser.

Our specific points, below, which justify our request for an investigation.

The appraiser brought a male guest with her, without asking me in advance. I was very uncomfortable having 2 people, not one, in my home. She did not bring her identification to the house, and seemed put out when I asked her for some or a business card. In fact, she told me she didn’t have any, yet. I had been told she’d been working with the company for years.

While in our home taking pictures, she moved at least one item several feet, with the intent of illustrating our home’s “lack of improvements:” a tower fan. We use the fan for white noise. It is not necessary for cooling; we have a perfectly capable a/c system for that. Actually, two. Lastly, she asked a number of questions about our renovation. Her report was delayed over a week due to her claim that she was trying to research our permit for the work done. Had she asked me, I would have given her a copy of the permit.

From the date she was assigned to the date she visited the property, 2 weeks of our rate lock were wasted. We waited another 2 weeks for her report. I believe she intentionally caused significant delays in our appraisal process to eat up the time of our rate lock. This is inexcusable.

Comparing the April **, 2015 appraisal will support our request for investigation. Here, though, is a list of our issues with [redacted]’ report:

Why [redacted] is a Q2 with aspects of Q1:

• Is a unique structure, individually designed by an architect for a specific user, the Bridges. It is constructed from detailed architectural plans and specifications featuring exceptionally high levels of workmanship and exceptionally high-grade materials throughout the interior and parts of the exterior.

• The design features high quality, high-grade materials and interior refinements.

• The home features the upgrades listed on pages 34 and 35 of the appraisal, including:

Premium Upgrades

o Safe room (tornado and security) poured free standing from house with high compression concrete with steel door and sandwiched, laminated roof

o Typical carport was reframed and extended by 6 feet to accommodate modern car sizes. It has its own storage alley.

o Coffered ceiling in large family room

o Tray ceilings in kitchen and breakfast room

o Custom designed kitchen, custom-made cabinetry, high-end appliances, extra thick limestone countertops (bathrooms and kitchen)

o All plumbing fixtures are Hans Grohe, Kohler and Grohe.

o Bead board ceilings in hallway, master, front and back porches

o Custom 300 sq ft back porch with vaulted ceiling

o 2200 square feet of the home has 9, 10, 11, and vaulted ceilings

o Custom antique barn doors in living room

o Antique heart pine and cypress doors throughout ($500 per door)

o Dual-zone hvac system

o Plumbed for whole house vacuum

o Custom front porch

Why [redacted] is not a C2:

• The home is not renovated. Granite countertops were added to original cabinetry, which had been recently painted.

• There is nothing modified or upgraded about it.

• The only change made architecturally to the original house, which was exactly like all the others in Peachtree Manor Heights, was taking down the wall between the kitchen and family room.

• The garage is not even dried in. It has one wall of louvered shutters to the exterior.

• The kitchen/garage door is not up to fire safety codes

• Not one of the bathrooms was renovated; the tile floors, walls, and shower are original, as are the cabinets

• The house has original, narrow, crown, window and door trim, as well as hollow core doors from 1958

• The floors were re-finished in 1995

• The interior and exterior were recently painted, not well-finished.

• The basement had water problems and smelled like mildew.

• All ceilings are 8’

• One hvac system upstairs; one in basement

224 Midvale

• The lot is 16,688 square feet smaller on a cut through which backs up to a shopping center; Why was there no adjustment for the lot size? The average lot value is around$500,000 in our neighborhood.

• Seems absurd that ~$60 a square foot is applied to our house’s additional square footage given the cost of incremental square footage which was all constructed in the last 7 years. The additional 1,300 feet plus interior upgrades cost over $350,000. To say that is worth ~$78,000 using your math is absurd. That is a 22% return on investment.

• No increase in value to address our covered porch when they have none

• Same as point 2 above under Midvale address

[redacted] • This place is a dump: floors are a mix of parquet, tile, and carpet – no recessed lighting

• Looks like an apartment complex – lucky they sold it at all

• Again, our quality of construction was not accurate, so the adjustment needs to be changed

• House is located on a cut through street

Thank you for considering our complaint.Desired Settlement: I would like a full refund. Damages for the threat I felt by the appraisal bringing a male guest would be preferable, but that is unlikely.

Business

Response:

Below is the play by play from the appraiser Cheryl W[redacted]. It must be noted that [redacted] NEVER hired this firm to do any work or perform any services so this complaint and request for a refund is completely unfounded and out of place. [redacted] NEVER paid the appraiser Cheryl W[redacted] or the company Sielken Davis LLC. Sielken Davis LLC works directly for Appraisal Management Companies. In this case we were hired by an AMC and NOT [redacted] so a refund is impossible because we were never paid by her and never invoiced her for any money. [redacted]' appears upset that she did not qualify for her refinance and is accusing the appraiser of causing that. See below for what actually happened back in April according to the appraiser: At the time of inspection, Thursday April **, 2015, I did take someone else with me as a witness due to the lender/client warning me about [redacted] trying to push comparable sales on them. This is a sign of someone trying to push value upon an appraiser, which is unacceptable in appraisal practice, therefore I wanted to have someone else with me in case she tried to influence a value on me in any way I would have a witness. I did not explain the reasoning that I had someone with me to [redacted]. She did not inform me in any way that she was uncomfortable with someone else being there. Arriving at the property I first introduced myself and introduced the person I was with by name. She then asked me for a business card and I informed her that I was out of them and in the process of having more made. At that time she did appear to be uncomfortable and said that was just not how a professional she be and that was unheard of. I then told her that I could leave before proceeding any further with the inspection and have the lender/client reassign the order to another appraiser. I did have a copy of my appraisal license in the car and I offered to retrieve them and she responded by telling me not to worry about it and to continue with the inspection. I continued by asking about any renovations that had been made on the property and she explained while walking me through the house and showing me some of the upgrades. I did not take any interior photos at this time I was just observing the upgrades she was showing me. I explained that I would need to measure the exterior of the home then I would need to reenter in order to properly label the rooms on the sketch along with taking photos of each room. She wanted me to complete the interior first then proceed outside to measure. I explained to her that I needed to have the exterior measurements (sketch) first as it is needed to properly label the rooms on the sketch once inside. She did not appear too happy with this request and said that she would not tell me how do my job anymore and to do what I needed to do. Once reentering the interior [redacted] asked me to explain the appraisal process to her as she was not familiar with the process and I graciously did so the best that I could. She appeared to not be comprehending what I was telling her as she even made a comment to me that she did not understand . I took my time to try to explain it again along with letting her that their are certain (USPAP, Fannie Mae, lender, client, state) guidelines, regulations, standards that we have to follow and she appeared to be getting very irritated again (I'm not sure if it was with me or herself) for not understanding. She told me again to just do what I had to do on the inside as she went to the back bedroom/office and stayed on the computer the entire time I was taking the interior photographs. Throughout the inspection I have to walk through the house and take photos of every room. I angle the camera to get the best shot of the room WITHOUT moving anything in the rooms. I am the eyes for the lender/client and try to get the best pictures, especially any updates/renovations on the property. [redacted] gave me a copy of the renovated/updated items that she made up from her computer. I scanned the list of improvements she gave me into the appraisal report when submitted to the lender/client with the proper interior/exterior photos taken. I asked her if she had the permits for the renovations/additions and she told me yes put she did not know where they were. I informed her that I would have to verify that the renovations were permitted through the city/county. This process can be time consuming as the the permits department is not easy to reach. Many messages and many continuous calls were made in attempt to verify the permits. I finally reached someone at the permi ts department and I was informed that they have a new process for obtaining permits. I would have to go online to file out a form for verification of the permits, I asked how long this would take she informed me that it could be a couple of weeks or more. Due to this taking time the lender/client requested that I make the report "subject to" (subject to the renovations/additions being permitted) and submit the report so I did so on April [redacted]. Once the report is sent it is then out of the appraisers hands and up to the lender/client to approve the loan or not As far as me intentionally causing delays in the appraisal process to eat up time of her rate lock. I as the appraiser is unaware of the time limit placed on a rate lock, this is between the homeowner ([redacted]) and her lender. The appraiser has no knowledge of any rate lock time restraints. If a time restraint is nearing the end of time this is something that the homeowner needs to discuss with their lender and not the appraiser then the lender/client will contact the appraiser as the appraiser has nothing to do with what is agreed upon between the homeowner and their lender. I have received no payment/fee from [redacted] as I receive my payment/fee from a third party source known as an AMC (the appraisers client) which acts as a middle man between the appraiser and the lender. If she paid someone it was her lender, in the amount that was agreed upon between her and her lender, not me as the appraiser. As I was leaving [redacted] home she asked me to explain the appraisal process to her again and I spent another 20 to 30 minutes with her on her front porch. She apologized to me for not understanding that, in her own words "she really was not a stupid person as she has a couple of master degrees but she had been under a tremendous amount of stress due to her health issues (battling cancer) and medication that she was on and now her sons health issues, which he had to be hospitalized." She then went into to telling me that the whole reason for the refinance was due to her son having to be hospitalized. I then gave my condolences and wished her and her son the best. I understand that [redacted] has another issue with the "Q2" rating. This rating refers to the "Quality of Construction". I actually rated her home as a "Q3" rating therefore I believe that [redacted] is trying to refer to the "Condition" rating and not the "Quality of Construction" rating of her home as the condition was rated as a "C2". However, I have explained all the ratings that have been mentioned in the following paragraph. [redacted] home was built in 1957 with a recent renovation and additional square foot added. Although there have been very nice renovations to her home it is not a "unique structure" from the other properties within her neighborhood. As they were built/constructed by the same/similar builder in the 50's. The recent renovations to her property have been considered within the "condition" rating of her home then compared to other properties within her marketing area. Again, a list of her renovations were scanned into the report , dually noted and properly considered then adjusted for. As far as her garage being extended you can still only store two cars within the garage. An adjustment for a garage is not adjusted by the square footage of the garage however it is adjusted by the number of cars for that garage. It is not unusual for a garage to have additional storage room/area in it. I understand that [redacted] has an issue with some of the comparable ([redacted]) that were provided. After the report was sent to the lender/client the lender/client notified me of these issues and requested a revision. These issues were addressed and commented on within the report on April [redacted]. Five comparable sales were provided within this report and although there were comparable sales provided that were not in the same/similar condition or same/similar quality of construction as [redacted], they were provided for bracketing purposes and proper adjustments were made for the differences if deemed necessary. Two of the comparable sales were of the same/similar condition and four were of same/similar quality of construction. All items (such as the GLA, site size, room count, condition, quality of construction, car storage, porches/decks/patios, etc.) have to be bracketed as this is part of appraisal practice. The appraisal ratin g that [redacted] is referring to "Q2" and "Q1" is as follows: Q1 - Dwellings with this quality rating are usually unique structures that are individually designed by an architect for a specified user. ([redacted] home was constructed by a typical builder in that marketing area in the 50's). Such residences typically are constructed from detailed architectural plans and specifications and feature an exceptional high level of workmanship and exceptionally high-grade materials throughout the interior and exterior of the structure. The design features exceptionally high-quality exterior refinements and ornamentation, and exceptionally high-quality interior refinements. The workmanship, materials, and finishes throughout the dwelling are of exceptionally high quality. (This quality rating is the highest level of rating and is typically used for multi-million dollar properties.) Q-2 - Dwellings with this quality rating are often custom designed for co nstruction on an individual property owner's site. However, dwellings in this quality grade are also found in high-quality tract developments featuring residence construction from individual plans or from highly modified or upgraded plans. The design features detailed, high quality exterior ornamentation, high-quality interior refinements, and detail. The workmanship, materials, and finishes throughout are generally of high or very high quality. Q-3 - Dwellings with this quality rating are residences of higher quality built from individual or readily available designer plans in above-standard residential tract developments or on an individual property owner's site. The design includes significant exterior ornamentation and interiors that are well finished. The workmanship exceeds acceptable standards and many finishes throughout the dwelling have been upgraded from "stock" standards. Please note that [redacted] property was not constructed as a "unique structure" as it is a brick ranch home, sitting on the same foundation as it did when first built in the 50's. It is of similar construction and style as the other properties within the subdivision however the front porch has been modified along with the rear porch with additional square footage added to the rear. Some/most of the interior features have been updated/renovated. The "condition" ratings is as follows: C1 - (This is the highest level of rating there is.) The improvements have been very recently constructed and have not previously been occupied. The entire structure and all components are new and the dwelling features no physical depreciation.*Note: Newly constructed improvement that feature recycled and/or components can be considered new dwellings provided that the dwelling is placed on a 100% new foundation and the the recycled materials and the recycled components have been rehabilitated/re-manufactured into like-new condition. Recently constructed improvements that have not been previously occupied are not considered "new" if they have any significant physical depreciation (i.e., newly constructed dwelling that have been vacant for an extended period of time without adequate maintenance or upkeep). C2 - The improvements feature no deferred maintenance, little or no physical depreciation, and require no repairs. Virtually all building components are new or have been recently repaired, refinished, or rehabilitated. All outdated components and finishes have been updated and/or replaced with current components that meet current standards. Dwellings in this category either are almost new or have been recently completely renovated and are similar in condition to new construction. If you need any further clarification please feel free to contact me.

Consumer

Response:

I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID# [redacted], and am concerned that my and my son's very private health issues will be published on your web site in the business's response. Please help me to keep these things private. I am unsure if you publish names or not. Although I disagree with the business's response, she has made it personal; I thus wish to end the complaint. please inform me how to do so without completely withdrawing it.Best, [redacted]

[Your Answer Here]

In order for the Revdex.com to appropriately process your response, you MUST answer the question above.

Sincerely,